Philly Mag Top 50

[Vadouvan]

Greetings Phil A Dining....

Exactly how were these conclusions reached ?

Just curious about the criteria.

[Mano]

Greetings Phil  A Dining....

Exactly how were these conclusions reached ?

Just curious about the criteria.

←

I had the same reaction so I read page 67 carefully.

"Three restaurant critics with almost 50 years of eating in the region, and 1,000-plus meals in the past 12 months alone...defining what makes a restaurant 'best' was the subject of months of debate. We took into account food, atmosphere and service... amorphous ideas like value, consistency, identity and ambition. And every once in a while, we simply found ourselves charmed, as foodies often are, by bold ideas... we argued (narrowing) 8,000 restaurants to 80... then 50"

I appreciate the obvious effort that went into the article. However, IMO the results accurately reflected the criteria; a sometimes jumbled hit and miss venture. FWIW, I love reading about restaurants, but I stopped reading The Philly Mag 50 after the first six reviews. No doubt I'll go back and read more as I spend time each morning in my "office."

Edited January 29, 2008 by Mano (log)

[Vadouvan]

Interesting !

Let me clarify, it's not that I have a problem at all with the rankings, I really am just curious about how the list was compiled. One thing I will say is this, I enjoy reading philly mag food articles but a lot of entities use that statistical anomaly to justify the details.

3 people non of whom are at least 50 years old can have a combined 50 years of eating experience.

I remember how the 4 seasons used to say they had a combined 150 years of cooking experience by simple addition, math statistics just don't quite work that way.

Their experiences are similar, concurrent and co-exist in the same time span.

It may be nitpicky bullshit but It's mathematically incorrect.

But really ! Positano coast ranked higher than the places below it

[Mano]

But really ! Positano coast ranked higher than the places below it 

←

I was wondering who would be the first to get this ball rolling!

[MarketStEl]

3 people non of whom are at least 50 years old can have a combined 50 years of eating experience.

I remember how the 4 seasons used to say they had a combined 150 years of cooking experience by simple addition, math statistics just don't quite work that way.

Their experiences are similar, concurrent and co-exist in the same time span.

It may be nitpicky bullshit but It's mathematically incorrect.

←

Perhaps, but if the experiences are concurrent and even similar but not identical, I don't understand why you can't accumulate them.

No two diners' experience of the same restaurant will be identical unless they both dine together on the same visit, and even then there will likely be differences. Nor will the same diner's experience of the same restaurant on different visits -- that's why restaurant reviewers usually make at least two separate visits to a restaurant before writing a review.

Tastes also evolve differently over time for different people, even within the same time span. Find me someone else born to African-American parents in Kansas City, Missouri, on Oct. 22, 1958, and I can guarantee you that you won't get the exact same life story, tastes or preferences.

In terms of set theory, what we have are intersecting but not congruent sets. To the extent that the group of people in question have visited the same establishments within the same given time span (e.g., the lifetimes of the diners), then we cannot say their cumulative experiences are completely separate, but given that experiences vary within narrower time frames, neither are they completely identical, and IMO it's no less accurate to add their individual time spans together than it is to conflate them into a single number based on the age of the oldest member of the group.

Put another way, "2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2."

[Buckethead]

I'd say the presence of Positano Coast on the list and the absence of Horizons is plenty to invalidate the whole thing. Nothing against Positano, it's OK, but top 50? Above Tinto? And Horizons a no-show?

[KatieLoeb]

I didn't think Supper had been opened long enough to make the cut, myself.

[Vadouvan]

In terms of set theory, what we have are intersecting but not congruent sets. To the extent that the group of people in question have visited the same establishments within the same given time span (e.g., the lifetimes of the diners), then we cannot say their cumulative experiences are completely separate, but given that experiences vary within narrower time frames, neither are they completely identical, and IMO it's no less accurate to add their individual time spans together than it is to conflate them into a single number based on the age of the oldest member of the group.

Put another way, "2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2."

Total Nonsense !

You miss the point completely.

Either combining or averaging is wrong.

The evolution of cooking evolved in a timespan, a significant portion in which none of the protagonists were alive.

Unless someone there was alive when Careme and Escoffier were cooking, makes no sense.

It simply creates hyperbole to suggest that any six 24 to 40 year old people have 150 years of cooking experience.

By the way 2 has a finite value.

There are no such things as "large values of 2"

Unless you work at the Pentagon, Truth is not subject to interpretation.

Back to the Top 50, I am off to Positano tommorow night, I shall report back.

[philadining]

The magazine's website here>> has some explanation of the process in the intro before the list, including a podcast where April White and Ashley Primis discuss some of the criteria, and challenges. The website doesn't currently include full write-ups for each restaurant that are in the print version, ya gotta buy the magazine for that!

[MarketStEl]

Put another way, "2 + 2 = 5 for large values of 2."

By the way 2 has a finite value.

There are no such things as "large values of 2"

←

I heard that line as a joke back in college, told by either a math major or a computer science major. (FTR, I was a government major.)

I thought the humor was clear. And when you get into the higher theoretical reaches of math, numbers do some pretty strange things.

Lighten up, man.

Edited to add: I might concede your main point, however: I have nearly 30 years' experience as a professional writer, including 16 consecutive years full-time in public relations and related work, under my belt. The company that hired me in December found out that hiring two younger writers, each with about 7-10 years' experience, didn't cut it -- and yet following the arithmetic logic you dissed, they had an aggregate 15-20 years' experience, arithmetically speaking. I replaced both of the younger writers, BTW.

Edited January 29, 2008 by MarketStEl (log)

[serpentine]

Perhaps, but if the experiences are concurrent and even similar but not identical, I don't understand why you can't accumulate them.

Meh, I actually agree with Vadouvan. And I think that this "combined years of experience" line is overused overheated rhetoric.

Not knocking experience, just the justification of editorial opinion with silly pseudo-math. There's nothing wrong with a magazine having an editorial opinion. To dish out that "50 years of combined eating" thing is a tiny bit demeaning to the writers' actual credentials, in my opinion.

Though it could be stretched into even more hilarious new math, though. If I feel the experience of dining out TWICE AS DEEPLY as the "average" person, my TE (total experience) should perhaps be at least = years of experience + years/2, yes? I also claim a 10 point bonus for my ability to write coherently. Others may negotiate their own algebraic experience quotients.

[Chuckles52]

Han Dynasty made it. In my book everything else is sauce (or is that gravy?)

[KatieLoeb]

Were the restaurants supposed to be ranked in order? Because if that's the case they've got some 'splainin' to do. Han Dynasty needs to be way higher on that list and Positano Coast??? Seriously????